Ceuta: Two-story shacks built on unauthorized land

Two-story shacks in Ceuta: no one signed off on the project

In Ceuta, someone has built two-story homes with stairs and balconies on land that isn't theirs. Or so the images circulating these days about the autonomous city's settlements suggest. Others flatly deny it: the photo is fake, they say, and they accuse anyone sharing it of falling for a hoax. Between the evidence and the denial, one fact remains undisputed: the two-story shacks are already on public land.

The permit no one requested and the study no one did

The central argument isn't about aesthetics. It's about paperwork. Such a construction lacks a certificate of occupancy, hasn't undergone a geotechnical study, and hasn't calculated load hypotheses for snow, earthquakes, or wind. Just looking at the structure's tilt, someone might remark that the skyscraper looks a bit crooked. The irony is self-evident: for months, it was repeated that many of the new arrivals had higher education. What's visible here, for now, is guasonry.

Chaboscrapers, they call them jokingly, as the joke stands tall.

Who should demolish them and why they aren't

All eyes are on the president of the Autonomous City, Juan Vivas. It's argued that he has the authority to tear down what's built on public domain and isn't using it; some go further, suggesting that residents themselves could hold him accountable for inaction. The alibi, according to critics, is always the same: eviction is the State's responsibility, and the State looks the other way. Rule of Law, they summarize with a smirk.

On the ground, the hypothesis has also emerged that the autonomous city finds itself in a legal limbo that allows curious things to happen. No one has put forward any solution other than delay.

Luna Blanca and the grant that remains active

On the list of grievances is a municipal NGO, Luna Blanca, which distributes food to new arrivals. The question being asked is whether the city council will cut that grant or, directly, increase it. For now, nothing has been announced, and the silence fuels suspicion that it won't be touched.

The informal market growing around

Around the shacks, an improvised economy is described, ranging from subletting to charging for a piece of land with no visible owner. There's talk of markets springing up in weeks, of intermediaries, and of a business that only grows as long as the structure stands. Some see a goldmine here to study how a market is set up from scratch. The object of study, however, is a settlement without running water.

Housing that doesn't arrive while bricks wait

And beneath it all lies the issue that almost no one wants to look at twice. Young people cannot afford a roof over their heads, land is highly regulated, and prices are set by scarcity, not real demand. With that outlook, the uncomfortable question arises on its own: a legal housing development would take eight years to be built, yet here two wooden towers went up in a month and a half.

In the end, the process gets stuck at the same point as everything else. No one disputes anymore that there are two-story structures on land not owned by those who erected them. The problem begins when it's time to decide who orders the demolition, with what resolution behind it, and who pays the money. And there, with the crane still not having started, the analysis gets blocked.